On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 07:39:07AM +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: [...] > As a language change, definitely not. But I like this idea for > PYTHONBREAKPOINT. You set it to the name of a function, or to "pass" > if you want nothing to be done. It's a special case that can't > possibly conflict with normal usage.
I disagree -- its a confusion of concepts. "pass" is a do-nothing statement, not a value, so you can't set something to pass. Expect a lot of StackOverflow questions asking why this doesn't work: sys.breakpoint = pass In fact, in one sense pass is not even a statement. It has no runtime effect, it isn't compiled into any bytecode. It is a purely syntactic feature to satisfy the parser. Of course env variables are actually strings, so we can choose "pass" to mean "no break point" if we wanted. But I think there are already two perfectly good candidates for that usage which don't mix the concepts of statements and values, the empty string, and None: setenv PYTHONBREAKPOINT="" setenv PYTHONBREAKPOINT=None -- Steve _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
